2018 California Proposition 68

Last updated

Proposition 68
Flag of California.svg
Natural Resources Bond
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes3,808,00057.35%
Light brown x.svgNo2,831,89942.65%
Valid votes6,639,899100.00%
Invalid or blank votes00.00%
Total votes6,639,899100.00%

California Proposition 68 (also the Natural Resources Bond or the California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018) was a legislatively referred constitutional amendment that appeared on ballots in California in the June primary election in 2018. It was a $4.1bn bond measure to fund parks, environmental projects, water infrastructure projects and flood protection measures throughout California.

Contents

Proposal

The Proposition would allow the State of California to borrow $4.1bn using a municipal bond scheme in order to fund parks, water and flood protection infrastructure and various environmental projects. The Proposition set allocation of these funds between different strategies: [1]

The cost to the public was estimated to be $7.8bn after paying off interest, or an average annual repayment of $200m for forty years. [1]

Campaign

Support

Proposition 68 was authored by State Senator Kevin de León. [2] The 'Yes' campaign focused mainly on the improvements the Proposition would bring to parks, saying that it would remedy years of "under-investment" in environmental infrastructure in poorer communities. [3] 'Yes' supporters spent more than $9m throughout the campaign. [4]

Endorsements

Opposition

Opposition to Proposition 68 mainly argued that instead of issuing debt, the state should fund parks and environmental projects through California's general fund. [12] It was also noted that although the 'Yes' campaign was promoting the Proposition on its benefits to parks, less than one third of the money would actually go towards parks and recreation. [13]

Endorsements

Results

Yes/No Statement

A "yes" vote on Proposition 68 proposes: The state could sell $4.1 billion in general obligation bonds to fund various natural resources-related programs such as for habitat conservation, parks, and water-related projects. A "no" vote on Proposition 68 proposes: The state could not sell $4.1 billion in general obligation bonds to fund various natural resources-related programs. [1]

Results

Proposition 68 gained 3,808,000 yes votes and 2,831,899 no votes (a total of 6,639,899 votes), so passing with 57.35% approval

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 California Proposition 57</span> 2004 California ballot proposition

Proposition 57 was a California ballot proposition on the March 2, 2004 primary election ballot. It was passed with 4,056,313 (63.4%) votes in favor and 2,348,910 (36.6%) against. The proposition authorized the state to sell $15 billion in long-term bonds to pay off accumulated deficits. Proposition 57 went into effect only because Proposition 58 also passed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 6</span> Rejected statutory initiative

California Proposition 6, also known as the Safe Neighborhoods Act and The Runner Initiative, is a statutory initiative that appeared on the November 2008 ballot in California. This proposition was rejected by voters on November 4 of that year.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 3</span> Californian law

Proposition 3 is a law that was enacted by California voters by means of the initiative process. It is a bond issue that authorizes $980 million in bonds, to be repaid from state's General Fund, to fund the construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping of children's hospitals. The annual payment on the debt authorized by the initiative is approximately $64 million a year. Altogether, the measure would cost about $1.9 billion over 30 years out of California's general fund.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 5</span> 2008 California ballot proposition

California Proposition 5, or the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act was an initiated state statute that appeared as a ballot measure on the November 2008 ballot in California. It was disapproved by voters on November 4 of that year.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 7</span> 2008 California ballot proposition

California Proposition 7, would have required California utilities to procure half of their power from renewable resources by 2025. In order to make that goal, levels of production of solar, wind and other renewable energy resources would more than quadruple from their current output of 10.9%. It would also require California utilities to increase their purchase of electricity generated from renewable resources by 2% annually to meet Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of 40% in 2020 and 50% in 2025. Current law AB32 requires an RPS of 20% by 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 10</span> Ballot measure in California

California Proposition 10, also known as the California Alternative Fuels Initiative, was an unsuccessful initiated state statute that appeared on the November 2008 ballot in California. Proposition 10 was funded by Clean Energy Fuels Corp., a corporation owned by T. Boone Pickens. Clean Energy Fuels Corp. is the nation's leading operator of natural gas vehicle fueling stations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 12</span> Passed ballot proposition to assist veterans

Proposition 12 appeared on the November 4, 2008 ballot in California. It is also known as the Veterans' Bond Act of 2008. The measure was legislatively referred to the ballot in Senate Bill 1572. The primary sponsor of SB 1572 was Senator Mark Wyland, R-Carlsbad. The vote to place the measure on the ballot was passed unanimously in both the California state senate (39-0) and assembly (75-0).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2012 California Proposition 39</span> Ballot measure in California modifying corporate tax burdens

Proposition 39 is a ballot initiative in the state of California that modifies the way out-of-state corporations calculate their income tax burdens. The proposition was approved by voters in the November 6 general election, with 61.1% voting in favor of it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2012 California Proposition 30</span> California ballot measure regarding taxes

Proposition 30, officially titled Temporary Taxes to Fund Education, is a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. The initiative is a measure to increase taxes to prevent US$6 billion cuts to the education budget for California state schools. The measure was approved by California voters by a margin of 55 to 45 percent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2016 California Proposition 51</span> 2016 California ballot proposition

Proposition 51 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot, regarding $9 billion in bonds to fund construction and improvement of K-12 and community college facilities. The measure designates $7 billion for K-12 projects falling under four types of projects, and $2 billion for any facility project for community colleges. No other bond measures related to education have been on the California ballot since 2006.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2016 California Proposition 52</span> California law

Proposition 52 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot, regarding indefinitely extending an existing charge on hospitals to fund Medi-Cal health care services. The charge, called the "Hospital Quality Assurance Fee", has been collected since 2009 with temporary renewals and was scheduled to expire on January 1, 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2016 California Proposition 55</span> 2016 California ballot proposition

Proposition 55 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot, regarding extending by twelve years the temporary personal income tax increases enacted in 2012 on earnings over $250,000, with revenues allocated to K–12 schools, California Community Colleges, and, in certain years, healthcare. Proposition 55 will raise tax revenue by between $4 billion and $9 billion a year. Half of funds will go to schools and community colleges, up to $2 billion a year would go to Medi-Cal, and up to $1.5 billion will be saved and applied to debt.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 California elections</span>

California state elections in 2018 were held on Tuesday, November 6, 2018, with the primary elections being held on June 5, 2018. Voters elected one member to the United States Senate, 53 members to the United States House of Representatives, all eight state constitutional offices, all four members to the Board of Equalization, 20 members to the California State Senate, and all 80 members to the California State Assembly, among other elected offices.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 California Proposition 6</span> Failed amendment to the Constitution of California

California Proposition 6 was a measure that was submitted to California voters as part of the November 2018 election. The ballot measure proposed a repeal of the Road Repair and Accountability Act, which is also known as Senate Bill 1. The measure failed with about 57% of the voters against and 43% in favor.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 California Proposition 12</span> Ballot measure in California requiring certain space requirements for farm animals

Proposition 12 was a California ballot proposition in that state's general election on November 6, 2018. The measure was self-titled the Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act. The measure passed, by a vote of about 63% Yes to 37% No.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 13</span> $15 billion bond initiative for educational facility maintenance

Proposition 13 was a failed California ballot proposition on the March 3, 2020, ballot that would have authorized the issuance of $15 billion in bonds to finance capital improvements for public and charter schools statewide. The proposition would have also raised the borrowing limit for some school districts and eliminated school impact fees for multifamily housing near transit stations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 15</span> 2020 California ballot measure

California Proposition 15 was a failed citizen-initiated proposition on the November 3, 2020, ballot. It would have provided $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion in new funding for public schools, community colleges, and local government services by creating a "split roll" system that increased taxes on large commercial properties by assessing them at market value, without changing property taxes for small business owners or residential properties for homeowners or renters. The measure failed by a small margin of about four percentage points.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 14</span> Citizen-initiated ballot measure

California Proposition 14 is a citizen-initiated ballot measure that appeared on the ballot in the 2020 California elections, for November 3, 2020. It authorizes state bonds to be issued worth $5.5 billion, which will fund the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), which serves as the state's center for stem cell research, and enable it to continue its operations. This measure passed with 51% of the vote.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 22</span> Gig economy workers employment status ballot initiative

Proposition 22 was a ballot initiative in California that became law after the November 2020 state election, passing with 59% of the vote and granting app-based transportation and delivery companies an exception to Assembly Bill 5 by classifying their drivers as "independent contractors", rather than "employees". The law exempts employers from providing the full suite of mandated employee benefits while instead giving drivers new protections:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 California Proposition 30</span> 2022 California ballot proposition

Proposition 30 is a California ballot proposition that appeared in the general election on November 8, 2022. The measure was defeated. The initiative would have raised taxes on the wealthy to fund wildfire management and electric vehicle incentives and infrastructure.

References

  1. 1 2 3 "Proposition 68". Legislative Analyst's Office . June 5, 2018. Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  2. "California's Prop 68". National Recreation and Park Association . Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  3. Ravani, Sarah; Garofoli, Joe (June 6, 2018). "Prop. 68 passes to inject $4.1 billion into CA water, land conservation projects". SFGate . Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  4. Cart, Julie (May 30, 2018). "Parks and politics: What you need to know about Propositions 68 and 70". CalMatters. Retrieved May 9, 2020.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Austin, Paige (May 18, 2018). "What Is Proposition 68? Voter Guide for 2018 California Measures". Patch.com . Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  6. "California Newspapers Endorse League-Supported Propositions 68, 69 and 72 on the June Ballot". League of California Cities . May 15, 2018. Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  7. "Endorsement: Yes on Proposition 68 to preserve parks, protect water supply and enhance our climate resilience". Los Angeles Times . April 26, 2018. Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  8. "Vote 'yes' on all the June 2018 ballot measures but one". The Sacramento Bee . March 22, 2018. Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  9. "California 2018 primary election: Yes on Proposition 68". Daily Bruin . June 3, 2018. Retrieved May 9, 2020.
  10. "Editorial: Prop. 68 water, parks bond deserves Californians' support". The Mercury News . March 10, 2018. Retrieved May 9, 2020.
  11. "California Proposition 68, Parks, Environment, and Water Bond". Outdoor Industry Association. Archived from the original on July 13, 2018. Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  12. 1 2 3 Rogers, Paul (May 21, 2018). "Proposition 68: Will voters approve $4.1 billion for parks and water projects?". The Mercury News . Retrieved May 8, 2020.
  13. 1 2 "Editorial: Vote no on Proposition 68, state's parks and water bond". Chico Enterprise-Record . May 21, 2018. Retrieved May 9, 2020.
  14. "Election 2018: Peace and Freedom Party endorsements for ballot propositions 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72". Peace and Freedom Party . May 14, 2018. Archived from the original on September 10, 2020. Retrieved May 8, 2020.